As final results from the Texas Democratic caucus remain unknown, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign wants signatures from the March 4 contest verified before party conventions are held around the state later this month.

In a letter sent to the state Democratic Party late Friday, the Clinton campaign requests the March 29 count and state Senate district conventions be postponed until the eligibility of an estimated 1 million caucus-goers are double checked.

56. IN this instance, they very well may be unfair. The TX caucuses were comprised

of only voters who cast votes in the primaries. If HRC won the primaries at those same voters went to the caucuses, wouldn't it make sense that HRC would win the caucus? It's certainly worth checking the signatures.

Hey, Obama bumped several opponents off the ballot in Illinois by questioning signatures. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

The people that go to the caucuses are typically more politically engaged and better educated. Sorry, that is a big advantage for Obama. You HRC supporters like to spend a lot of time here at DU whining and ranting. You should have gotten off your duffs and attended a caucus.

And they made nobody show voter IDs or verify they were in the right precinct.

Why didn't they check? Because the guy who was apparently in charge (self-appointed, which was fine in the absence of anybody actually asking to vote for precinct captain) said it didn't matter--they'd be checking everybody's eligibility in any event. He made sure all the alternates were appointed, because, he said, it was possible the numbers would change when they verified eligibility.

"No lawsuits ***before*** TX primary election day"Remember that non-denial when there were rumblings that she was going to sue TDP for wanting to expedite the caucus results--they were going to(and did) put forth $60,000 toward a voluntary system that would have counties get their results in faster since the race was so tight and everyone was wanting the results.

TX laws allow 3 full days to get the caucus vote results into the state but with the race being watched around the country so closely they wanted to give quicker results. HRC got wind of this, threw a fit, her campaign manager said that "rushing the caucus results would only give half baked and flimsy results" and then inplied lawsuits.

HRC got her wish, was able to claim a "TX victory" that night (even though some TX caucuses were STILL going on past the media announcement that she "won TX")---our precinct caucus was delayed by 2 hours and didn't END til 10:30 pm (CST)...so not only were all the caucus votes in TX not counted yet, they were not even CAST yet when she amd the media was up there saying with the ONLY primary votes TX was in her win column (the words "caucus votes" were NO where in the TV talking heads vocab that night).

Give it up, HRC...TX voters made their decision..the results have dribbled in slowly just as you wanted so they are far from "half baked and flimsy". Wonder what her internal numbers are showing about March 29th when the final TX caucus numbers are due?? Has she lost even more delegates than she thought she would?

not happy about the intimidation that went on at some of the caucus sites. Wish I had kept a link. Those signatures need to be verified. Obama people were the first to praise Kuch for wanting a recount in NH that found NOTHING.

The election judges verify the voters when they come in to vote in the primary. From that point, the voters get a stamp on their voter rgistration card showing they voted democratic, or they got other verification that they voted democratic (a "receipt").

Hillary better be damn careful with this. First, it will net her nothing. Second, the area most ripe for voter fraud (that would be turned up by "inspecting" signatures is the valley -- which went 80-20 for Hillary. the African American precincts always vote, and vote heavy. She's really screwed up this time.

Final note: Caucus (precinct convention) goers do not "sign in." They just fill out their information -- no signatures. She's gonna get spanked hard on this one.

Just as Bill Clinton said prior (quoted in TX newspapers) to that Super Tuesday as he encouraged HRC voters to go and caucus that night..."It would be a shame for her to win during the day, only to lose come night time". She lost the caucus vote and THAT is why she wants the results challenged.

When the story "breaks" (the one we all already know) that she was claiming to have "won" texas, but actually got less delegates, it'll be a media feeding frenzy, unless she can get a few more wins under he belt, first.

36. But it wouldn't hurt her much, the media has already (falsely) proclaimed

her the victor, and any new declaration about the caucus and delegates is not going to be noticed. Just seems like a strange thing to do, when she's already making an obnoxious cheating ass of herself regarding Florida and Michigan.

And before anyone gives me any cr*p about being a HRC supporter, CHECK MY PREVIOUS POSTS ON DU. I HAVE NEVER SUPPORTED HRC. I have been one of the most vocal opponents of her positions on outsourcing and h1-b visas. I despise the DLC and have said so on various threads over the last year.

No one is going to check all 1 million signatures/IDs, they will take a random sampling and extrapolate from that. That is common procedure for, say, verifying initiative and referendum petitions. Still, it's going to slow things down, and belies Clinton's lack of confidence in her chances.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.